루브릭
검사별 이진 통과 또는 실패
모델이 과제 지시를 따르고, 소스 파일에 숨겨진 요구 사항을 파악하고, 올바른 근거를 사용해 적절한 결론에 도달했나요?
AA-Briefcase는 수천 개의 입력 파일과 총 91개 과제로 구성된 4개의 다주간 지식 업무 프로젝트에서 모델을 평가합니다. 각 시나리오에서 모델은 데이터 과학, 제품 관리, 기업 전략 등의 분야에서 현실적인 전문 업무 흐름을 완수해야 합니다. 각 시나리오는 에이전트가 순서대로 진행하는 다주간 업무 흐름이며, 매주 여러 과제가 포함됩니다. 각 과제의 결과물은 검사 항목 루브릭으로 평가됩니다. 한 시나리오의 과제들은 여러 주에 걸쳐 파일과 맥락을 공유하지만, 현재 모델은 이전 제출물을 이어받지 않고 각 과제를 독립적으로 실행합니다.
각 과제는 세 가지 유형의 검사로 평가됩니다.
검사별 이진 통과 또는 실패
모델이 과제 지시를 따르고, 소스 파일에 숨겨진 요구 사항을 파악하고, 올바른 근거를 사용해 적절한 결론에 도달했나요?
쌍대 비교
다른 모델의 제출물과 비교했을 때 어느 결과물이 더 철저하고 분석적으로 엄밀하며 근거가 충분한가요?
쌍대 비교
다른 모델의 제출물과 비교했을 때 어느 것이 더 전문적으로 표현되었나요?
시나리오 구조, 제출 및 채점을 보여 주는 다섯 번째 공개 시나리오를 Hugging Face에 공개했습니다. 이는 시연용이며 AA-Briefcase 공식 결과에는 포함되지 않습니다.
결과물 파일 형식(Excel, PowerPoint, PDF, Word, 기타)에 따른 AA-Briefcase 성능입니다.
AA-Briefcase 실행 중 각 에이전트가 호출한 도구: 도구 범주별 호출 수, 턴당 평균 호출 수, 소스 탐색 범위를 보여 줍니다.
개발사 | 이름 | Elo | CI | 출시일 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | 1817 | -11 / +12 | 2026년 9월 | |
| 2 | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | 1802 | -11 / +12 | 2026년 9월 | |
| 3 | Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | 1764 | -11 / +11 | 2026년 9월 | |
| 4 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | 1751 | -13 / +14 | 2026년 9월 | |
| 5 | Muse Wonder Full (Max) | 1729 | -10 / +10 | 2026년 10월 | |
| 6 | Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) | 1686 | -10 / +11 | 2026년 9월 | |
| 7 | Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) | 1672 | -9 / +10 | 2026년 9월 | |
| 8 | Claude Opus 5 (Max) | 1659 | -8 / +9 | 2026년 7월 | |
| 9 | Muse Wonder (Max) | 1659 | -10 / +10 | 2026년 10월 | |
| 10 | Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | 1655 | -8 / +9 | 2026년 9월 | |
| 11 | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | 1641 | -9 / +10 | 2026년 9월 | |
| 12 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) | 1636 | -9 / +11 | 2026년 9월 | |
| 13 | Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) | 1634 | -7 / +9 | 2026년 7월 | |
| 14 | Grok 4.7 (High) | 1631 | -9 / +9 | 2026년 9월 | |
| 15 | Claude Opus 5.5 (Medium, Default Fallback) | 1625 | -10 / +11 | 2026년 9월 |
A composite benchmark aggregating ten challenging evaluations to provide a holistic measure of AI capabilities across mathematics, science, coding, and reasoning.
A private evaluation developed by Artificial Analysis for frontier agentic capability in long-horizon knowledge work, testing agents on realistic business workflows that require deliverables such as spreadsheets, presentations, and memos.
GDPval-AA v2.1 is Artificial Analysis' evaluation framework for OpenAI's GDPval dataset. It tests AI models on real-world tasks across 44 occupations and 9 major industries. Models are given shell access and web browsing capabilities in an agentic loop via Stirrup to solve tasks, with Elo ratings derived from blind pairwise comparisons.
A benchmark developed by Artificial Analysis for how well AI models build interactive 3D experiences. Models work as agents in an offline sandbox via Stirrup to turn a written brief into a three.js scene, with Elo ratings derived from blind pairwise votes.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of the APEX-Agents benchmark, testing AI agents on long-horizon, cross-application tasks in professional-services environments with realistic application tooling.
Artificial Analysis' data analysis benchmark, testing AI agents on their ability to work with spreadsheets and documents to answer quantitative questions a Business Analyst or Data Analyst would face day-to-day.
A benchmark measuring agentic task completion across simulated SaaS application environments, scoring the share of each task's objectives completed without guardrail violations.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (LAB), testing AI agents on real-world legal work from Harvey's dataset of 120 private tasks spanning 24 legal practice areas. v1.1, built in collaboration with Harvey, checks every deliverable against the task's source documents for hallucinations, so work that passes every rubric criterion but contains a material hallucination receives no credit. A panel of three judges grades each deliverable criterion-by-criterion.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of Surge AI's GDP.pdf benchmark, testing whether language models can reason over long, real-world professional documents and satisfy detailed task-specific criteria.
Artificial Analysis' independent implementation of ServiceNow's EnterpriseOps-Gym, an agentic benchmark testing whether LLM agents can complete stateful, multi-step enterprise workflows across eight business domains via live tool use, graded on the final state of the underlying databases.
A harder 66-task benchmark of complex terminal work across software, machine learning, science, operations, security, hardware, and media, with recalibrated compute and time allowances and improved instructions, environments, and verifiers.
A 70-task benchmark of research workflows authored and reviewed by domain experts across the life, physical, earth, mathematical, and engineering sciences, each completed in a terminal and checked by its own set of tests.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of Cognition's FrontierCode 1.1, a private agentic coding benchmark that tests models on completing coding tasks in a way that would actually get merged by maintainers of real-world repositories.
Measures how models communicate rather than whether they are correct: 30 judged personality traits rolled up into 8 indexes, plus 21 measured communication characteristics.
A challenging benchmark measuring language models' ability to extract, reason about, and synthesize information from long-form documents ranging from 10k to 100k tokens (measured using the cl100k_base tokenizer).
A benchmark measuring factual recall and hallucination across various economically relevant domains.
A scientist-curated coding benchmark featuring 288 test set subproblems from 80 laboratory problems across 16 scientific disciplines.
A frontier-level benchmark with 2,500 expert-vetted questions across mathematics, sciences, and humanities, designed to be the final closed-ended academic evaluation.
A benchmark designed to test LLMs on research-level physics reasoning tasks, featuring 71 composite research challenges.
The most challenging 198 questions from GPQA, where PhD experts achieve 65% accuracy but skilled non-experts only reach 34% despite web access.
Artificial Analysis' implementation of IBM's ITBench benchmark, testing AI agents on Kubernetes incident root-cause analysis from offline incident snapshots. The agent inspects alerts, events, traces, and topology and identifies the contributing-factor entities (deployments, pods, namespaces, network policies, etc.) responsible for the failure.
An enhanced MMMU benchmark that eliminates shortcuts and guessing strategies to more rigorously test multimodal models across 30 academic disciplines.
A benchmark evaluating precise instruction-following generalization on 58 diverse, verifiable out-of-domain constraints that test models' ability to follow specific output requirements.
An open benchmark from Wisedocs measuring how well models reason over long, fragmented medical records, performing the multi-document synthesis claims professionals rely on when reviewing insurance and healthcare cases.
OpenAI's HealthBench: 5,000 health conversations graded against physician-written rubrics, from emergency referrals to global health.
OpenAI's HealthBench Professional: 525 clinician conversations covering consult, writing and research tasks, graded against physician-written rubrics.
A fintech customer-support benchmark from the 𝜏-Knowledge framework that tests whether agents can navigate a large unstructured knowledge base and execute multi-step tool calls to resolve realistic banking workflows.
A verified refresh of Terminal-Bench 2.0 — 89 curated tasks across software engineering, system administration, data processing, model training, and security, with environment and instruction fixes so scores reflect agent capability rather than environment gaps.
An agentic benchmark evaluating AI capabilities in terminal environments through software engineering, system administration, and data processing tasks.
A dual-control conversational AI benchmark simulating technical support scenarios where both agent and user must coordinate actions to resolve telecom service issues.
An enhanced version of MMLU with 12,000 graduate-level questions across 14 subject areas, featuring ten answer options and deeper reasoning requirements.
A contamination-free coding benchmark that continuously harvests fresh competitive programming problems from LeetCode, AtCoder, and CodeForces, evaluating code generation, self-repair, and execution.
A 500-problem subset from the MATH dataset, featuring competition-level mathematics across six domains including algebra, geometry, and number theory.
All 30 problems from the 2025 American Invitational Mathematics Examination, testing olympiad-level mathematical reasoning with integer answers from 000-999.
A lightweight, multilingual version of MMLU, designed to evaluate knowledge and reasoning skills across a diverse range of languages and cultural contexts.